Fatal Incompetence In Victorian Magistrate's Court's.

Victorian State Coroner Judge Jennifer Coate's Review of Family Violence Deaths Reveal the Incompetence and Ineffectiveness Of Intervention orders in Victorian Magistrate's Courts. In a High number Of fatal Domestic Disputes, Intervention Orders were Breeched.

8 homicides were Committed By people who were the Subject Of Intervention Orders. In 2007-2008, 4 people died who were supposed to be Protected by An intervention Order. In 11 Incidents the perpetrator or Victim had contact wth the Police or the Courts, only 6 Months before the death occurred.The Report goes on To State The Ridiculously Obvious.

IT IS EVIDENT THAT AN INTERVENTION ORDER DOES NOT RESULT IN AN END TO VIOLENCE.

With Due Respect to Judge Coates, The Victorian Corrections System Could not even Protect CARL WILLIAMS in a High Security Victorian Prison. How Does Judge Coates think a Piece of Paper handed to an AFM is Really Going to Protect Them from Violence. All Great in Theory but in Practice its a lot of Baloney.

Whenever a Tragic Death Takes Place, We have The Usual Police Spokesman Sprout to the News Media That Police are Going To take a Strong Stance against Domestic Violence, But Predictably all this Means Nothing. If a Victim calls 000 The police AREN'T Going to Immediately come to the Damsel's Aid as in Some John Wayne Western. The bottom Line is Either The Victim Defends Themselves or Some Brave Bystander Or Neighbor Comes to the rescue.

In the Kara Douglas And Christopher Wayne Hudson Case, It was a Very Brave Lawyer Brendan Keller and Dutch Backpacker Paul De Waard who Stepped Forward and said No to Violence against Women. Tragically Brendan Keller was Killed in Broad daylight in the Melbourne CBD.

We also Have Politicians Then Coming Forward and saying we are going to Introduce Tougher Legislation To Combat Domestic Violence and quote The Usual Statistics to back up Their Concern. Governments have Done This Many Times with Very Little Results.

We Then Get Down To the Judicial System In Victoria who say we are Going to Get Tough and Jail Men who Breech Intervention Orders, But What a Brainless Solution That Really Is. They Place Men In Prison's who then Mix with Criminals who have access to all sorts of Weapons, Shotgun's etc. The Court may make the Defendant a Prohibited Person, But That means Nothing To The Prison Inmate. Just go and see my mate when you get released from Prison he'll Fix you up with a Firearm.

The Defendant is Released from Prison and there are no Checks by police To make sure The Defendant Hasn't Obtained a Firearm. If the defendant Knows where the Protected Person Lives, They are a Sitting Duck. The Court System has Ignited a Situation that Shouldn't Happen and Then Sends The Defendant to a place Guaranteed to Supply an Illegal Firearm, No Permit Required.

For Some Very Odd Reason, Magistrates and Registrars in Victorian Magistrate's Courts Then think The Answer is to Just Give EVERYBODY an Intervention Order, Just go along to The registrar's Counter Fill in a form, Make a Complaint that will be automatically accepted as True & Correct, The magistrate will then Suggest to The Defendant To consent without admitting to The allegations made In the Order. The Defendant does this because it will cost at least $600 in Legal Fee's to Contest The order. Getting an Intervention Order In Victoria is as easy as Getting a Big Mac at a McDonald's Outlet and its even Cheaper, It Costs You Nothing.

I Have Heard Magistrate Bolster say to AFM's In His Courts, If there is a breech Of the Order, call the police and They Will Become Involved. Unfortunately, Mr Bolster,The Real world is Not That Simple, it may work on Non Violent Defendants, But if somebody is Determined to Harm Somebody, The Intervention Order you have issued will Not work. Yes the Police will become involved but Tragically that will be after you're Seriously wounded or DEAD.

Fiona Warzywoda went to the Sunshine Magistrates Court about an intervention order but was tragically killed after leaving the Court and going to her Solicitors Office.

An audiotape of Rosie Batty was aired on Television where she was extremely Distressed appearing before a Magistrate at Frankston Magistrate's Court, where she was told to sit down by the Magistrate. Her son Like Batty was later Killed by his Father. Today everybody wants to listen to what Rosie Batty and what she has to say about Domestic Violence, she was also made Australian of the Year. I wonder what the Frankston Magistrates Court would say to her Today.???.

What happens is Magistrate's now issue final orders for any applications for intervention Orders so that they cover their backs in case anybody is hurt or killed. This defeats the purpose for those Women & Children who are in real Danger from Domestic Violence.

Stupid Misuse's Of Stalking Complaints in Victoria

I Have Been in Court when Magistrate Len Brear has Said, The Intervention Order Laws are there to be used with Common Sense and I doubt that any Police Officer would Charge you For Breeching An intervention Order If You had a Legitimate Excuse To Be in a Public Place.

 A Victorian Man attended a large Music Festival in January 2012 in Tamworth, The So called Defendant walked along the Main street of the Town (Pictured Left) checking out The Buskers, The Music,The Hotels, The Shops etc. When he Noticed only 10 metres in front of Him, His Ex Wife and his Ex Mother- in-law standing on the Footpath, Quickly he walked over to the other side of the street and Kept Walking, The Street was Filled with Many Country Music Lovers, Tourists etc.

The Defendant kept looking at Shops, the Musicians and eventually turned around and headed back up the street to where the Four wheel Drive was Parked, as he was walking along his Ex Wife and His ex Mother-In-law stepped out of a shop, he just kept on walking and was almost past them when they stepped Out of the Shop on to the footpath, the defendant totally ignored them and never saw them again at the Country Music Festival. The Defendant had a Legitimate Reason to Be there as he is a Country Music Radio Announcer with 33 Years Experience who had interviewed many of the Artists at The Festival.

Later that Year in Dec 2012, the Defendant applied to end his ex-wife's Intervention order that had been issued in Dec 2001, some 11 years Earlier, The Defendant's Ex wife & Ex Mother-in-law had indicated to the court in a letter read to The Court By Magistrate Jillian Crowe  that they were stalked in Tamworth and they claimed they reported this to the Town's Police Force.The Defendant had a legitimate Reason to be there enjoying The Country Music Festival, what was he supposed to do?????, cut his Holiday Short and Head back to Victoria???.

What The defendant's Ex Wife Didn't Realize in making these False allegation's To the Court was The Defendant was actually walking down Peel St in Tamworth with 3 Very Good friends, who he had driven up with in THEIR 4 Wheel Drive who could easily verify that no Stalking took place.  Similar False allegations had also been Made by his Ex-wife.


The Defendant had on another occassion gone to a Local Hotel in Melbourne to see a Music Performance with a number of his Friends he was there to see Steve Eales who the defendant had interviewed on Radio Earlier that week. He had parked his car in the rear Car park Of The Royal Hotel in Ferntree Gully in Melbourne, he then walked Through the Gaming room into the Lounge area where the band was Set to play, The Defendant enjoyed the Night with his Friends but at the end of the Night. The Defendant went to leave and had to walk through the gaming room back into the Carpark to his car. As The Defendant went to walk out he noticed his ex-wife sitting at the Poker Machine Right Next To The Exit Glass doors. The Defendant Immediately returned to the Lounge Area and Waited and waited.

The Band was packing up and his Friends had Left But The Defendant's ex Wife was still sitting at the Same Poker Machine, So The Defendant asked a member of the security Staff to walk with him through the gaming room to the exit. The Defendant said nothing would happen but he did that to avoid any further False allegations being made by his ex-wife. In The Letter Read By Magistrate Jillian Crowe the Defendant's ex Wife In the same Letter alleged  that she was stalked at the Royal Hotel and the Defendant had to be Thrown out by Security Staff.

The allegations in the letter were completely false, if the respondent was a threat to his Ex Wife why did she deliberately sit at a Poker Machine right next to the Exit Door for so long, there were many other Machines Available . Magistrate Jillian Crowe had suggested that the Respondent's wife give evidence via a Video link for her protection. This was totally ridiculous as the Respondent was no threat to his Ex Wife.

The Ex wife made false allegations to the Court and the Respondent had now appeared 4 Times before Magistrate Jillian Crowe before this ridiculous Intervention Order was finally ended. Despite this,  no action was taken by Magistrate Jillian Crowe over the Respondents Ex Wife's false allegations.

Later on it came to light that his Ex Wife had remarried & moved to Queensland and no longer lived in Victoria, that's why his Ex Wife didn't appear at Ringwood Magistrate's Court.... The Intervention Order had Now become a holiday intervention Order.!!!....How the respondent was supposed to know when his Ex Wife was back in Victoria on holiday is a mystery.

No action was taken by the Court over the Ex Wife's false allegations. 

Magistrate's Court's in Victoria have Lost The Plot!!!!.

The Defendant Went to a Magistrate's Court in Melbourne on the 15th August 2012 to finally end an Intervention Order that had been around since December 2001. The Magistrate Granted Leave of the Court To the Defendant to vary the Order to have an end date of  31/12/2012.

The Matter was Adjourned until 28th August 2012. The Defendant attended court on that day before Magistrate Jillian Crowe.The Court has received a letter from The Defendant's ex-wife that the matter be adjourned as the Police only served the application to the Defendant's ex-wife on the 24th August 2012. So in effect it Took Police 9 Days to serve the application to vary the Order, only 4 days before the Hearing.

Magistrate Jillian Crowe on the 28th August then adjourned the matter for another Fortnight to Sept 11th 2012. The Defendant attended again on September the 11th and Once again the Defendant's Ex-Wife did Not attend Court but Once again another letter was sent to the Court asking for the Matter to be adjourned once again.

Despite the fact the Defendant had already gained Leave of The Court to apply to Vary The order, Magistrate Jillian Crowe on September the 11th Adjourned the Matter again, Saying that she was granting The Defendant Leave of The Court, Yet again but not To Vary the Order as the Defendant Requested but to apply to Revoke The order. The matter was adjourned to the Fourth Court appearance on November 28th 2012.

The Problem with the Decisions handed down By Magistrates in Intervention Order cases in Victoria is they are not based on evidence but purely based on a Person's Gender. They are Not Court's Of Law, They are Courts of Assumption Because women will be automatically Believed, Men will Not. If you appear before a Female Magistrate, then the case will be even more Biased against you in Victorian Courts.

Applying for an Intervention Order in a Magistrate's Court in Victoria is as easy and as simple as Going to McDonalds and asking for a Big Mac. Just walk up to The Counter and the registrar will immediately start the Process. You Then go into the court before a Magistrate and your allegation will automatically be guaranteed to be Deemed True & Correct, Especially if you're a woman, There is no Police Investigation into your allegations at all.

In The Past Criminal acts consisted of Physical Harm, Robbery, Property Damage etc. Not any more, even though Intervention Order applications are a Civil Injunction by the applicant, when the Courts grant a final Intervention Order, Generally for 12 Months. They open up a Pandora's Box of what can now be Considered to be a Breech Of an Intervention Order and a Criminal Offence, with a possible 2 Year Jail term and a $28,000 Fine.

Despite the Fact that there is no Criminal Intent at all by the Defendant, Intervention orders can seriously affect, Where you Shop, Swim, Exercise, Where you can walk in Retirement Village's, What Road's you can Drive Down, Where you go to Eat and Drink. The List is Endless.

I have no problem with Intervention Orders being Genuinely used to Protect People from Family Violence, but there are many people using the McDonald's Approach to Intervention Orders, and taking advantage of this easy to get approach by Registrar's and Magistrate's in Victorian Court's.

Much of this has been Created by Rob Hulls The Former Attorney General in The Labor Government in Victoria. The Ironic Part of his approach is, His Labor Collegue Theo Theophanus was Wrongly accused of Rape, but at the time it was Assumed by many People and The Media that the Allegations were Correct, It Ruined Mr Theophanus Political Career, but after Much effort it was found that the allegations Of Rape against him were false.

The Police use much the same Principle when Gathering Evidence, When a matter comes before a Court a Police Informant brings evidence before the Court To Be used by The prosecution, The Problem is The Police are not only the So called Informant but also the Judge & Jury as to what evidence is used, There are Prisoners who have served Long Sentences because the Full evidence was not brought before the Court. In These Cases the Defendant has to virtually Prove His Innocence, rather than the Other way Round.

Victorian Court's have Definately Lost The Plot!!!!, but the Victorian Legal System will hand down a Lenient Sentence to one of their Mates, not even Magistrate Raffaele Barberio was put Through such a Harsh Court Process handed down by Magistrate Jillian Crowe, even Though Raffaele had been on the Bench in Victoria for over 20 Years.

In 2010, Magistrate Raffaele Barberio became Involved in a Dispute with His Neighbour Over Dog Poo, and pleaded Guilty In Moorabbin Magistrate's Court to assault and Intentionally Damaging Property, A Local Couple Complained to Mr Barberio about his Dog's Droppings, after he Failed to pick up the Dog Poo. When The Couple Threatened to Report Mr Barberio to The Council, he Threatened to Punch the Male Driver Through an open window.

After The police Served a Brief of Evidence, Raffaele Barberio went To The Victim's Home and Used a key to Scratch Both Side's of The Couple's Car. Mr Barberio Who had 24 Years On The Bench was Convicted By Magistrate Paul Cloran from NSW, Because Mr Barberio Would have Known Not to approach The Victim Of the Earlier Dog Poo Incident Because of his many years on The Bench.

Magistrate Raffaele Barberio Received a 2 Year good Behaviour Bond. Not 11 Years. It was stated that Mr Baeberio was suffering delayed Grief over The Death of His Mother  in 1975, 35 Years ago???, Surely they couldn't be Serious???.

A Distorted View Of Intervention Orders in Our Courts.

It was the 28th August 2012, in Courtroom Eight Magistrate Jillian Crowe was hearing Intervention Order Cases, She said to The Legal Representatives Of Both Parties in Adjourning the case, Do You really want to appear back in Court in December???, Some People have a Distorted View of What Intervention Orders can Do, They can't make a Sad person Happy.

What an Understatement by Magistrate Crowe, Of Course many People have a distorted View of What Intervention Orders Can Do and also what they Should Be used For as well. This applies To Magistrate's in Victorian Magistrate's Court's as well.

The History of Intervention Order's and AVO'S In Australia is Littered With Tragic Stories Of people who have been Killed because they Falsely Believed that Intervention Orders would Protect Them, because they had a distorted View Of What Intervention Orders Can Do.

 In Effect The Whole Intervention Order Process is Built on a Distorted View that Handing Intervention Orders to everybody Will Somehow Prevent Violence In Family situations. This approach has never Been Successful, it doesn't work.

I Have Sat in Magistrate Doug Bolster's Court Many Times and Heard him say to an applicant, If there is a Breech of The Intervention Order, call the police and they will become Involved.

Yes that may well happen but not in the way Magistrate Doug Bolster May think.

TWO  000 calls were made By Penny Pratt in Melbourne who was murdered minutes later  after an emergency operator did not pass the request for attendance to police. "I'm hiding in a bush answering your questions,"  Ms Pratt said, adding there were "three violent offenders" after her

In This Case Penny Pratt rang 000 to Get Police assistance, The Police did become Involved, but only after the Tragic Death of Penny Pratt, In Many cases People needing assistance By Police just Don't have The Time To call, Given the Violent Nature of Their Circumstances.

To hand Somebody a Piece Of Paper and Then Simply say, Ring The Police, Is a very Distorted and unrealistic approach  to What can be a very Dangerous Physical Threat. So after This Distorted Process Predictably Fails, What Does The Legal Authorities in Victoria Do????, Get More Police or More Trained 000 Staff???. No, They Just go out and change the Intervention Order Legislation again, Making the Orders even more Draconian.


The Next Case Before Magistrate Jillian Crowe is an example of How Ridiculous The Intervention Order Process has Become. The Defendant's Intervention Order had been in Place For Nearly 11 years and The Defendant had no Contact with his ex Wife at all in Nearly 9 Years. The defendant had Previously Sought Variations to The Order to Continue attending a Public Facility that he had been a member of, for About 11 Years. The Defendant has now been attending a Different Public Facility since 2004 to get away from his Vindictive Ex-In-laws.

Magistrate Jillian Crowe asked The Defendant how many times he had Previously Sought a Variation to The Intervention Order, Possibly about 2 or 3 Times, I Don't Really Know Replied the Defendant.

Since going to another Place Of Recreation in 2004 every application to end The Intervention Order Since That Time had been Heard By Magistrate Denise O'Reilly at Heidelberg Magistrate's Court,

 In 2004 The Defendant had taken out a membership At a Different Leisurecentre and Regularly attended the Public Facility Pictured at Left, none Of The Defendant's Ex-In-Laws Worked There or used the Facility.

Even Though the Defendant was using these Facilities To get away from His ex-in-laws and Avoid any Possibilty of a Breech of an Intervention Order. When the Defendant rang The Local Magistrate's Court and was Put Through to The Intervention Order Desk.




The Defendant was told he would still be Breeching an Intervention Order if One Of His Ex-in-laws Walked Into This Facility.So Even though The Defendant was now going Somewhere else to avoid his ex-in-laws, that did not eliminate the possibility of a Breech of the Intervention Order, Unless the Defendant Left The Leisurecentre. Considering the Penalties for Breeching an Intervention Order in Victoria are 2 Years Jail or a $28,000 Fine, it is far Better to Be Safe than end up Locked in a Police Jail Cell.

In the foyer Outside Courtroom Eight, I spoke to a guy Whose Female Partner had Taken an Intervention Order against Him, his Partner had then started coming Over To Visit Him, For This he was Eventually charged for Breeching an Intervention Order and was Told it was His Responsibility, Not His partner's to Keep away From Her. This is exactly the same as The Leisurecentre Situation, You can go elsewhere to avoid the Affected Family Member, but if they come to where you are, it is the Defendant's responsibility to keep away from the AFM.

It is Certainly a very Distorted and Ridiculous application of a Breech of Intervention Order.So Magistrate Jillian Crowe's Statement that People have a Distorted View Of What Intervention Order's can do is Definately True, But How Ridiculous can It Get????

 In Western Australia ,Bradley Jones was Convicted of Killing his Wife Saori after Punching Her and Leaving Her Dead Body In The House Decomposing for 2 Weeks. Despite The Fact a Drunken Bradley Jones Punched His wife in the Head during an argument. During Jones Sentencing Before Justice Lindy Jenkins , She said The Circumstances of This offence is Very serious Because you admitted hitting Your wife Very Hard

Justice Lindy Jenkins Then sentenced Bradley Jones To Five Years Jail, with a Non Parole Period Of  3 Years.

Bradley Jones is Lucky that he was sentenced in Western Australia by Justice Lindy Jenkins, Rather than appearing Before Magistrate Denise O'Reilly in Victoria.

Back In 2003 an Intervention Order was granted By Magistrate Denise O'Reilly For a Period  of 5 Years over a Woman's Complaint that her Cat Feeding Containers were Disappearing(Pictured At Left).

The Woman Even Told The Court that she wanted The Defendant in This Ridiculous Order to pay For The Cost of her Missing Food & Water Containers.


She told the Magistrate that she feared the Defendant would Punch Her and Take her Containers, which didn't make sense as the containers were placed in a Public Carpark at the rear of  a strip Shopping Complex. They Containers could be taken by anybody at any Time.


So In Western Australia you can receive a five Year Maximum Sentence For Manslaughter for punching & Killing your wife, with a Minimum of three, yet in Victoria you can end up with a five Year intervention Order Over the Disappearance of Cat feeding Containers?????.

Back In Courtroom Eight Before Magistrate Jillian Crowe, The Defendant seeking a Variation To His intervention Order which had been in place for Nearly 11 Years, asked why his application to vary the order should not be granted, when Violent Offenders like Bradley Jones will only Serve a Maximum 5 Years for Manslaughter. I Won't Comment on That was Magistrate Jillian Crowe's Reply to The Defendant's Question. The Defendant wanted to Know why an Intervention Order in Victoria Should last much longer than a Manslaughter Charge in Western Australia, The Sentencing laws do Not Make any Sense.

Victorian Magistrate's Demand that Defendant's or AFM's answer Their Questions Precisely, Yet if you ask a magistrate for a Clarification or Explanation Regarding an Intervention Order, if they don't want to or Can't answer Your question, they ignore you very Quickly.

In Another Case In a  Melbourne Court, an elderly women applied for an Intervention Order against another Elderly Woman Living in The Same Retirement Village, the Applicant Told The Magistrate that she wanted the Defendant stopped From going Past Her Unit from 4 Times a day to Only Twice a day. The Defendant told The magistrate she was only going Past To Visit her Friend's in The Village. The Magistrate granted The Final Intervention Order application for 12 Months and The Defendant could not Come within 20 Metres of The Applicant's Unit and had to walk on the Concrete Paths on either Side of the Applicant's Unit. What a distorted Decision handed Down By The Court!!!!, A Dispute Between two elderly Women in a Retirement Village????.

In Melbourne we're told that Family Violence is Increasing and we're Being Led to Believe it is all Because of Abusive and Violent Husbands, which is not really True.

For a long Time in Clubs, Hotels and entertainment Areas, Fight's and Street Violence has Dramatically Increased, resulting in a number of Deaths. Many of These Younger people Involved in These Fights return Home to Their Parents Homes Drunk or on Drugs, More Parents Are Finding They can't Cope with This anymore and Turn to Intervention Orders to protect Themselves From Their Children. Reports of Their Children Banging on Windows & Doors to get Their Parents to Let Them Into the House Have Increased, One application was against a son who came to his parent's house to abuse his parents for not giving him $15,000 to Buy a Car.

These situations can also Lead To Other Applications Before The Magistrate's Court's. I was in Court when One Father who wanted his 25 Year Old daughter to Move out into a Home of Her Own, ended up having an Intervention Order issued against Him By His Daughter, who had made Allegations against Her Father.The father Told Magistrate Greg McNamara that his Daughter's Intervention order was just a Frivolous Use Of an Intervention Order because she didn't want to Leave His Home, to which The Magistrate Replied, There are no Frivolous Orders issued By the Court.

I Would Definately Disagree, there are many people who misuse Intervention Orders. I have also seen a mother Crying in Court before a magistrate pleading with Him to at Least allow Her to Ring Her son. So Who is Going to Stop These Frivolous and Distorted Applications for Intervention Orders in Victorian Courts???. They are merely Trivial Disputes not associated at all with Family Violence.

There are More serious Problems associated with the lack of a proper  application of Intervention Orders. When a Magistrate Sentences Someone Who Breeches an Intervention Order To Jail. The Defendants are then Mixing with all Sorts of Criminals with access to all sorts of Firearms, When The Defendant is released, it would be a very easy process for the defendant to pick up a firearm from friends of Inmates they Met in Jail. There are No Checks by Police at all to make sure the Defendant has not obtained a Firearm to Shoot The Affected Family Member.

I sat in on a case involving a Taxi Driver who contested a Female workmate's Intervention Order Application, The Woman's application was rejected by The Magistrate, but it only took 4 Days for the Woman to apply for another Intervention Order at The Same Court aginst the Same Person. Once again The application went to another Contested Hearing.

I was at Heidelberg Magistrate's Court when  a defendant Contested an application for an Intervention Order for a second time, On Both Occassions the applicant failed to appear at court, it had cost the Defendant $3000 in Total to be represented at Both Hearings.

So why isn't this distortion of the Legal Process Stopped?????. Its Because their is no oversight by Court Staff, you simply make an application by filling in a form and away it Goes. These hearings have nothing to do with family Violence and are More Like The Jerry Springer Show.

No wonder there is a 48 Percent Increase in applications for Intervention Orders. Magistrate Ian Gray's Solution to the Problem is for the Government to spend more on court Resource's????. Are you Kidding!!!!.









 

Intervention Orders Versus Civil Liberties.

On The 15th August 2012, I walked Into Courtroom 4 In a Magistrate's Court in Melbourne. A Defendant was seeking A Variation to an Intervention Order Before Magistrate Len Brears.

The Defendant Told Magistrate Brears, Your honour I am seeking a Variation To an intervention Order that Prohibits me From Going To My Family Members Place Of employment. I Have To Travel with My work and My Family Members Place of Work is at Tullamarine Airport.

Well Magistrate Len Brears Said, The Laws are there to be used with Common Sense and I doubt that any Police Officer would Charge you For Breeching An intervention Order If You had a Legitimate Excuse To Be At The Airport.

From My Personal Experiences, What Magistrate Len Brears was Saying, Doesn't Necessarily Happen In The Real World, Intervention Orders can affect where People Shop, Swim Or Go To a Meeting even if you Have a Legitimate Reason To Be There. They can Seriously affect a Person's Civil Liberties On a day To day Basis, Outside The Theoretical world Of The Courtroom,  Here are a Number Of Examples Of What Really happens.

     A Defendant was in a Hurry in a large Melbourne Shopping Centre and Needed to Get a few Groceries Before going Home. His ex-Brother-in-law worked at The Store at Left which was Technically Covered by an Intervention Order, The Defendant asked The management Whether he could Get just a few Items From Their Store. Management told The Defendant that was OK,



The Defendant was in and Out of The store in 10 Minutes Around 12 noon On a Saturday Morning.There was no Criminal Intent by The Defendant, he just wanted to buy Some goods From The Store, But This was a Criminal offence by Virtue of The Intervention Order That was In Place In Victoria.

There was another Supermarket In The Same Shopping Complex, But that would also Be a Breech of an Intervention Order because Both stores are Run by The Same Company.

In Fact in This Case, Management told The Defendant's Ex Brother-in-law about The Defendant's Use of the supermarket,




The Police were Notified and The Defendant was Charged by Police For Breeching an Intervention Order.The Police Charge Sheet said, The So called Affected Family Member Felt Harassed & Intimidated By the defendant using The Supermarket,

The Charge was Completely Ridiculous, Because The defendant's Ex Brother-in-law worked at the Supermarket to Fill the Supermarket's Shelves Late at Night and Didn't actually work there during The day, so The So Called AFM was Not working in The Store at 12 Noon On A Saturday Morning at The time of the "Alleged Breech".of The Intervention Order.

 In another Intervention Order Case, The Defendant was a Member of a Club that had Scheduled a Special Meeting at a Meeting Room at The Local Council offices (Pictured Left). The Defendant was on The Committee of the Club and had Duties to perform During The meeting In cluding Taking a Video Of a Speech.





 The problem was the Committee had Invited Another Group That Included the Defendant's Ex Brother-in-law who had an Intervention Order against Him.The Defendant Rang The Local Police Station To Enquire, Who had a Legal right to Be at The Meeting as both the Defendant and his Ex Brother-in-law had Intervention Orders Against Each Other.

Well, The Police Officer  said we Would arrest You and Charge you if you Went to the Meeting, Because You are going to The meeting Knowing That Your Ex Brother-in-law Could be Going There too, which would be a Breech Of the Intervention Order.

The Defendant was Stunned to say The Least, The defendant had a Legitimate Reason to Be at the Meeting as he was a Committee Member, But The police Made it Very Clear that they Would arrest Him if he went to the meeting.

On One Visit To a Court In Melbourne, The Defendant asked Magistrate Greg McNamara To Clarify who had a Legal right To attend the meeting In this Type of Situation, To which The Magistrate Simply replied, If it was Me, I Wouldn't Be going. The Senior Magistrate has said From the Bench at this Same Court, That Intervention Order's are There to Provide Defendant's with Clear Boundaries as to what they can and Can't Do. The Defendant Left The Court None the Wiser in regards to his Legal Rights in Attending The Meeting.

You don't have to be a Young Thug Or Violent to be In This sort of Situation, An elderly Woman On a walker appeared Before Magistrate Marc Sargent Seeking a Variation to Her daughter's Intervention Order who worked for a Store that had Shop's in 2 Very Large Shopping Centres and a smaller Strip shopping store in Melbourne.

Your Honour, I need to seek Clarification as to Which Shopping Centre's I am allowed to attend, I have to be Able to shop Somewhere the Woman Pleaded,

Yes, it Needs to Be Clarified Replied The magistrate and adjourned The matter to a Return Date.

As I mentioned Earlier The variation Sought By A defendant before Magistrate Len Brears In Regards to Tullamarine Airport, resulted in The defendant Being able to attend Tullamarine Airport on Legitimate Business, But he will be Breeching The Intervention Order if He Fly's With a Particular Airline.


People should be able to attend Public Places without having to seek Clarification at a Magistrate;s Court on Intervention Orders that have Nothing to do with Family Violence at all.

The Majority of Intervention Orders In Victoria have an Exclusion Zone Of 200 Metres. The Defendant in This Case had been a Member of This Leisurecentre For over 10 Years, attending at Least 3 or 4 Times a week, But the Defendant's Ex mother-in-law rang Police Claiming that The defendant was Breeching The order Because The Far end of This Swimming Pool (Pictured Left) was within 200 Metres of her Back Fence.



So The defendant was Not Within 200 Metres at This End Of the Pool, But it was claimed He was at Some point at the Other end of the 50 Metre Lap Lanes.

The Defendant didn't want to Breech The Intervention Order so a Variation was sought to Vary The Order from 200 Metres, back to 150 Metres so that the Exclusion Zone Didn't Cover any part of The Leisurecentre.

The Application was heard by Victorian Magistrate Denise O'Reilly who handed this Decision Down.

The Leisurecentre is in fact within 200 metres, At least in part. Had the evidence been that you see them at the leisurecentre and leave immediately, then I might have made a different decision, but the fact is you see them and you don't leave. They end up leaving. Now they're the ones who have taken out the orders against you. They are not subject to orders. There is nothing that prevents them coming up to you and speaking to you, but you must not approach them. If they speak to you, you ought not be speaking to them, because they won't go to jail for speaking to you, but you will Go to jail if it can be construed that you have approached them, or that you have had a conversation which has preceded to develop into any behavior that could be called harassing or intimidating to them.

Maybe Magistrate O'Reilly Should read page 24 of the Book, responding to Intervention Orders, under the heading 'What does no contact mean" it says this. No Contact means no contact with the other person. It also means that the other person with the intervention order should not contact you. If the other person contacts you this could put them in Breech of the Order. So which interpretation is Right???. This illustrates the confusion that surrounds the interpretation of Intervention Orders in Victoria even by Magistrates.

This Interpretation of Victorian Intervention Order's By Magistrate Denise O'Reilly allowed the Defendant's Brother-in-law to take The Dispute one Step Further.

    The Defendant had Parked his Car To go to this Shopping Centre Pictured at Left, It was at Night and as The Defendant walked Towards the Shop's, His Ex Brother-in-law saw him and came Over and Blocked The Defendant Walking towards the Shop's by Standing 10 Metres in Front of Him.

The Defendant Kept on walking and as The Defendant got to the Right hand Side of the Supermarket His Ex Brother-in-law Followed him across to the Left Hand side of the Supermarket's Entrance.

At This Point The Defendant Turned around and Told his ex Brother-in-law to go away and Leave Him alone, in No uncertain Terms. Then The ex Brother-in-law Tried to Physically Grab The Defendant By The Arm and Said, Come on , I'm Taking you Over to the Police Station, Because you have Just Breeched My Intervention Order.

The Defendant decided it was time to also Seek an Intervention Order against his Ex-Brother-in-law Because Magistrate Denise O'Reilly's Decision allowed His Ex Brother-in-law to Approach Him and then claim it was the Defendant that had Breeched The Intervention Order, which could Lead to The Defendant Being Charged By Police.

The application was Heard By Magistrate Hugh Walter. The ex brother-in-law's Explanation of the Situation was Misleading and Quite different. Your honour The Ex Brother-in-law explained, I grabbed The Defendant by the Arm to stop Him Breeching The Intervention Order, Because he would Have been Breeching The order by entering the Supermarket, Which is My Place Of work.

Magistrate Hugh Walter asked the Defendant's Ex-brother-in-law how Long He Had worked at The supermarket. I have worked there for about a Month, Then I'll Go And Work at another Store For a Month and will Probably Return to work at this Supermarket again in a Few Months. The Defendants Barrister said to Magistrate Hugh Walter, how does my client supposed to know when his Ex Brother-in-Law is working at Which SuperMarket.??? Magistrate Hugh Walter agreed & Granted The Intervention Order against The ex- Brother-in-law Until Further order Because he had Tried to grab The Defendant By The Arm. At least the Defendant was now legally Equal with his Brother-in-Law in Terms of Breeching the Intervention Order.

What defendant's Don't Realize is that These type's of Intervention Order's can go on and On Like This for Years, and can affect your lifestyle Considerably, even What you consider to be your Normal Lifestyle can Become a Criminal offence simply By a Magistrate granting somebody an Intervention Order against you despite the Fact that Intervention Orders are Civil Dispute's, and you don't have to actually Harm anybody to have an Intervention Order issued against you. Once the Intervention Order is in Place, Anything can Happen, depending on a Magistrate Or police officer's interpretation Of the Law. As you have seen in These Examples.

Because your ex-in-law or relation has an Intervention Order against You In Victoria, they will then become Protected witnesses and any Time you seek To Vary Or Revoke the Intervention Order it will cost you a lot Of Money, because you Cannot Cross Examine the Other Person and you will be Forced to have Legal Representation at The Court. As Magistrate Max Cashmore said to One defendant, if You don't have Legal Representation then you Virtually have no Chance of winning the Case, even if you haven't seen your Relation or Ex-In-Law in many years, Magistrate's Such as Denise O'Reilly or Greg McNamara may not Consider your Evidence to Be " Changed Circumstances" and Deny Your Application because they might say that you are Simply Complying With the Intervention Order, which Doesn't constitute " Changed Circumstances"

An application Before Magistrate Marc Sargent to vary an Intervention order was denied, Despite The fact the Defendant had no Contact with His Ex-Brother-in-law in Nearly 8 Years,because The Magistrate Concluded that having the intervention Order Remain in Place, Created " No Impediment" To The Defendants Day to Day life. The applicant Didn't Have to Prove to the Court why the intervention Order Should Continue, The Defendant had to Prove to the Court why the order should End.

On the 15th August 2012, I Left Magistrate Len Brears Court and Headed Downstairs to Courtroom 8. In the witness Box was a Young Woman who was applying for an Interim Intervention Order against Her Husband, She was Quite Upset.

I am very concerned about the Safety of My Children the Woman Said, My Husband has The children and he has Been assessed by a CAT Team as Being Suicidal and I Believe he may also harm The Children too. The Magistrate adjourned The matter to a Final Intervention Order Hearing on a Future Date,

As I Have said Before, The intervention order Process is not really a Protection System, Lets hope The Husband Does Not Become Suicidal Before The Next Hearing Date by The Court.

48% Increase in Intervention Orders in Victoria.

Victoria's Chief Magistrate Mr Ian Gray has Demanded an urgent Upgrade Of Court Facilities to Cope with an Increasing number of Intervention Order Applications In Victorian Magistrate's Court's. He said Victorian Courts were struggling to Deal with a 48% Increase in Applications in Courts Over The Past Five Years. Courts are Groaning under The weight of This Load and The Victorian Government have to Invest a Lot More in Courts and Seperate Rooms For Interviews Etc.

Victoria's Acting Chief Police Commissioner Tim Cartwright said Police officers attended more cases and I Think "Victims" Are becoming More Confident in Coming Forward, He said It Would Take 10 Years for the Caseload to Decrease.  Berry Street Chief executive Sandie De Wolf said more people were coming forward to seek Help.

Personally I think Mr Gray, Mr Cartwright and Ms De Wolf should Spend more Time In Victorian Magistrate's Court's and Realize what Really happens There, Male Defendants are Judged Purely on their Gender rather than Evidence when they appear before The Court system in relation to Intervention Orders.

Of Course There are Genuine Cases Of Domestic Violence in Victorian Courts, My sister-in-law was Murdered by My Brother-in-law in a Murder Suicide many years ago, and I Certainly agree from First Hand Experience How Devastating Domestic Violence is, But Throwing Intervention Orders at Every application that Comes Before a Court is Not The answer. There are many non Violent Males & Females of all ages who end up having an Intervention order Imposed on Them For Trivial Reasons. Victorian Registrars and Magistrate's Churn out thousands Of These Type of Meaningless Intervention Orders.

The Current Court process is the Real reason for the Vastly Increased Numbers of Intervention Order's In Victoria. Many people have Realized  how easy it is To go out and apply For and Get an Intervention Order. I Have Heard Registrar's Tell Applicant's They are Not Really Interested in The allegations made in an Intervention Order, just fill in the form and bring it back to the counter.

When Defendants arrive at court, They Then have 2 Options, Spend Hundreds Of Dollars on a contested hearing which will be Heard at least 3 months away or Consent to a Final Intervention Order Being Made Without Making any admissions to The Court. Generally Most Defendants agree to this Sausage Machine Process, simply because, it is easier and Cheaper. Magistrate's Love it too Because they don't have to sit Through Hours Of Testimony Either in Contest.ed Hearings.

This Process has Nothing to Do with Justice or Protection of People Whatsoever, it is simply a Legal Bureaucracy and Baristers make lots of money for working in The Intervention Order System because Defendants cannot cross examine the other Party because they are so called "Protected Witnesses". In one Case The Applicant was Deemed a protected Witness because of The Disappearance of Her Cat Feeding Containers.(Pictured Above).

The applicant Told the Magistrate that This was her Place Of work because the Council Paid Her to feed The Cats Eating and Drinking From these Containers in a Public shopping Centre in Melbourne. The Council has Denied That they have ever Employed this Woman To feed These Feral Cats.

You also have to look at How Effective Interventions Orders Really Are???. In a recent finding in The Victorian Coroner's Court, A man returned to His Hallam Home and Murdered His in-laws Only minutes after Police had arrived at The home to issue an Intervention Order That The Police Had Misread.

Two Policemen Ordered The man Out Of the Hallam Home, The police watched The Man Leave The House and Followed him for Several Kilometres, but Drove Past The Man when He pulled Over, The Man Then Returned to the house and Took a knife out of the kitchen and Stabbed His Mother-in-law and Father-in-law to death. So What was The Purpose of Issing an Intervention Order???.

Victorian Coroner Judge Jennifer Coate Cleared Victoria Police of Negligence but Criticized the "Readability" of Intervention Orders In Victoria. In a submission, Victoria police said The Repetitive Nature Of the Intervention orders made It difficult for Police Officers To Read???. Judge Jennifer Coate said All parties would Benefit from More Streamlined and User Friendly Documents.Three Seperate Police misread The Intervention order and also missed reports of previous Domestic Violence Reports that were Made To Police.

When My Brother-in-law was Jailed for Breeching an Intervention Order, he Met Inmates who had Friends with access to all Sort of Firearms including Shotguns, They Didn't care that My Brother-in-law was a prohibited Person on his Intervention Order, he was simply given an address to go to and Pick Up a shotgun on his release from Jail.  Convicted Double murderer Leigh Robinson also had a Shotgun when he shot Tracey Membury, You Have To ask how did Leigh Robinson have a Shotgun despite the Fact he had been in Jail for a Long time and had a Long Criminal Record.

What will Magistrate Ian Gray, Max Cashmore, Nunzio LaRosa, Denise O'Reilly, Greg McNamara and Others do to Make Sure people Like my ex- Brother-in-law and Leigh Robinson don't Have Firearms in Their Possession?????, Just Give more People Intervention Orders????. Physically that will Never Solve the Problem and Never Has, Victorian Authorities Have Followed a Simplistic Solution on a Complex Problem for far Too Long.

I Have sat in Court Many Times and Listened to a Senior Magistrate say to Defendants that Intervention orders are There To Set Clear Boundaries in Regards to The Do's & Dont's of Intervention Orders. How does the Senior Victorian Magistrate Think This Is Possible, If Victorian Police Also Misread Intervention Orders???, But it's Not Just Members of The Public that end up in Disputes and Arguments with their Neighbours, it's also Members of Victoria's Legal System too.

In 2010, Magistrate Raffaele Barberio became Involved in a Dispute with His Neighbour Over Dog Poo, and pleaded Guilty In Moorabbin Magistrate's Court to assault and Intentionally Damaging Property, A Local Couple Complained to Mr Barberio about his Dog's Droppings, after he Failed to pick up the Dog Poo. When The Couple Threatened to Report Mr Barberio to The Council, he Threatened to Punch the Male Driver Through an open window.

After The police Served a Brief of Evidence, Raffaele Barberio went To The Victim's Home and Used a key to Scratch Both Side's of The Couple's Car. Mr Barberio Who had 24 Years On The Bench was Convicted By Magistrate Paul Cloran from NSW, Because Mr Barberio Would have Known Not to approach The Victim Of the Earlier Dog Poo Incident. Magistrate Raffaele Barberio Received a 2 Year good Behaviour Bond.

If Police Cannot Understand Intervention Orders and Members Of the Judicary in Melbourne become involved in unneccessary Disputes over Dog Poo, How Do they expect Members of the Public To Understand The System.

What Needs To Happen is Magistrate's & Registrar's In Victorian Magistrate's Courts Need to Realise that the Intervention Order System is Being Abused, Unfortunately Magistrate's Simply Issue them On the Balance of Probabilites because they don't want to be Blamed if Somebody Get's Hurt Or there is Property Damage, and to get the Order out The Door as Quickly as Possible, They want Defendants to Consent without Admission to the intervention Order.

 If this Process Continues The Courts May as well Introduce an Intervention Order Drive Through, which would save even More Time & Money, and Streamline The process even more. Just Consent without Admission.

Steps 2 Safety is really Steps to a Tragedy.

This Pamphlet handed out in Victorian Magistrate's Court's is Misleading because it is not a Steps to Safety Flowchart but really a Steps to a Tragedy Pamphlet.

No Piece of Paper handed to anybody regardless of Whether it is issued by Magistrate Denise O'Reilly, Magistrate Marc Sargent, Magistrate Nunzio La Rosa, Magistrate Max Cashmore or any Other Magistrate will Protect you on a day to Day Basis, Let alone a Period of Twelve Months.

If Somebody is Determined to Harm Or Murder you then an Intervention Order is from a Practical point of view Totally Useless, None of The Magistrate's Mentioned will be immediately Coming to your Aid, and you will be Extremely Lucky if the Police are able To Help. I Went to a Family Violence Meeting in Melbourne and a Woman said she Called 000 and the Police Took 90 Minutes to Respond to her Family Violence Call.

Victorian Prison Authorites Couldn't even Protect Carl Williams in Barwon Prison , he was hit and Killed with Part of an Exercise Bike and it Took Prison Staff 25 Minutes to Respond!!!!!.

So How do Magistrate's Think that handing you a piece of Paper Will Help you, It May in Non Violent & Trivial Cases, But Not in Violent Situations.

Magistrate's Jail Defendants for Breeches of Intervention Orders and place Them in Victorian Correctional Centres, But There are Inmates in Prison who will gladly Sell a Shotgun or Firearm to anybody, No Questions Asked and Give you an Address to Pick Up the Weapon after your release.

So After the Prisoner is Released from Jail, he simply goes to that address to Pick up The Weapon, The Inmate Doesn't care that the Defendant's Intervention Order Makes them a Prohibited Person.

 We Come to The Next Misleading Piece of Information handed out at Victorian Magistrate's Court's. I Call it The Sitting Duck Booklet. If The Defendant now has a Firearm and Know's Where you Live, Regardless of what this Booklet Says, You Are a Sitting Duck!!!!!---------- Putting The Defendant in Prison has most likely had the reverse effect, and made The Relationship more Volatile than it actually was Before The Defendant's Time in Prison.--------------- If There is no Police Check made, to make sure there is no Firearm. Then the Whole Intervention Order Process is really Steps To A Tragedy rather than Steps to Safety

Intervention Orders - The Arse End Of The Victorian Legal System

I was chatting to a Defense Barrister who mainly worked in The Victorian Legal System In Murder Cases, even though he had worked in this area for Many Years He Described the Intervention Order System in Victoria as The Arse End of Victorian Law.

Intervention Orders were once used to Prevent Woman & Children Under threat from Violent and Aggressive Husbands, but things have dramatically Changed, Anybody who has any sort of Complaint or Grievance against an Ex Husband or Neighbour can simply go to the Registrar's Counter at a Victorian Magistrate's Court, fill in a Form, Make any Type Of Allegation they like free of Charge, and The magistrate will Normally accept your allegation as True & Correct and issue you with an Interim Order In No Time At all.
The Unsuspecting Respondent Only Finds out about this when a Police Officer arrives on His Front Door To Serve The Interim Order on Them

So Now we Even have Intervention Order's Issued Because an elderly applicant in an Intervention Order Complaint in a Magistrate's Court in Melbourne, said she was in Fear because she believed  the Defendant would be waiting for her and was Going to Punch Her and Take away the Containers she Used to feed Stray & Feral Cats. Which didn't Make Sense because the Cat Feeding Containers were Put In a public Place Behind Shops and Anybody could remove them at Anytime, Here is a Video About The Intervention order Handed Down by Magistrate Denise O'Reilly in a Melbourne Court.

.

The Reason Magistrate's Like Denise O' Reilly Issue Intervention Orders Like This is because, They are issued on The Balance Of Probabilities, which Means regardless of any Evidence that May be Given or the Allegations Made, The Magistrate will issue an Order because They do Not want to Be Blamed for Not Issuing an Intervention Order If Somebody is Injured Or Murdered. The Magistrate's Court's in Melbourne also have an Incredible Bias against Men in These Cases because of the Composition The Family Violence Portfolio Committee which is mainly made up of Female Magistrate's. Which Includes.

Committee Chair: Magistrate Catherine Lamble Members: Deputy Chief Magistrate Felicity Broughton; Magistrates Amanda Chambers, Ann Collins, Caitlin English, Anne Goldsbrough, Annabel Hawkins, Kate Hawkins, Graham Keil, Gerard Lethbridge, Jo Metcalf, Denise O’Reilly, Pauline Spencer, Noreen Toohey, Belinda Wallington, Susan Wakeling, Michael Wighton and Acting Magistrate Francis Zemljak, together with the Manager of the Family Violence Projects and Initiatives Unit, Deb Nicholson.

Stop The Gender Bias in Victoria's Courts.

There is a very Heavy Gender Bias in Victoria's Magistrates Courts In Regard to Intervention Orders. Highlighted by The application Made By Former AFL Champion Gary Ablett in the Geelong Magistrate's Court. Gary says He Fears for his Life and those of his Children, He has applied for an Order against a 39 Year Old woman, saying he has endured Months of Stalking and Threats. Gary has also said he was almost Rundown by the Woman's Associate's.

Magistrate Stephen Myall Heard that Gary was also Fearful the Woman's Associate's would Harm His Son Gary who plays for The Gold Coast Suns. The woman has made my Life Hell by Texting Him Threatening Messages for month's on end. He had also Received Messages from People asking about His Children. Gary Ablett Claims the Woman said he would be dead in Six Months if he didn't Speak To The woman. Gary Ablett also Claims The woman's own family warned him not to be Involved with Her.

For some Odd Reason Magistrate Stephen Myall refused to grant the footballer the Intervention Order, saying more evidence Supporting Ablett's Allegations Needed To Be Given. If This was a Woman Seeking an Intervention Order, she would be Immediately granted an Order without the Need for any Further Evidence to be Given.

What The Hell Does Changed Circumstances Mean??

For Those Defendant's Who Have Been Slapped With An Intervention Order in a Victorian Magistrate's  Court, when you Try to Revoke or Vary The Intervention  Order, You have to Prove To The Magistrate That There has Been " Changed Circumstance's". Being able to Do This is Extremely Difficult because Nobody appears to be able to Give you a Definition of What "Changed Circumstance's " Really Means.

The First Query I made was to The Melbourne Magistrate's Court Help Service, I Queried with Them as to Where in The Victorian Family Violence Legislation is the Definition Or Guidelines as To What Constitutes, "Changed Circumstances". The Reply I Had from The Court was there was Nothing In The Legislation That Defined what " Changed Circumstances" Actually Means.

My Next Port Of Call was to go to a Solicitor and I Asked them What does " Changed Circumstances" Mean??. They Said Sorry we Can't Help You and said Welcome To The Crazy World Of Intervention Orders.

 I Was None The Wiser but I Thought That Maybe a Magistrate In a Melbourne Court would be Able To Finally Shed Some Light On The Definition of " Changed Circumstances" . To say The Magistrate's were Equally Non-plus is an Understatement.

A Defendant appeared Before Magistrate Greg McNamara and Told The Magistrate that there had been NO Contact by the Defendant with The Appplicant in Over 5 Years and He Wanted The Order Finally Revoked. Well Magistrate Greg McNamara said, Just Because you have had no Contact In Over 5 Years  Does Not Constitute " Changed Circumstances" that merely Means You are Complying With The Order, and Rejected The Defendant's Application.

Well The Defendant Said, If I have absolutely No Contact with The applicant, Then What Do I Need to actually Change to Prove "Changed Circumstances"???. Magistrate McNamara Then said he was not there to Give Legal Advice and Provided no Explanation Whatever as To What "Changed Circumstances" Meant.

Next Time The Defendant went to Court To Revoke The Intervention Order, Magistrate Bolster adjourned The Matter To Magistrate Denise O'Reilly who now worked at The Heidelberg Magistrate's Court. This was Some Time Since The Defendant had appeared before Magistrate Greg McNamara.

The Defendant again Explained To Magistrate Denise O" Reilly that he had NO Contact in Many, Many Years with the applicant and The Order should now Be Revoked. Once again Magistrate O'Reilly asked the Defendant what " Changed Circumstances" had Occurred, The Defendant really Didn't Know What To Say, and Once Again Magistrate O'Reilly Said, The Fact that you have Not Had Contact in Many Years Doe's Not Constitute " Changed Circumstances".

Again The Defendant asked Magistrate Denise O'Reilly to provide an Example of What Constituted "Changed Circumstances" and once again the Defendant received no Explanation.

On The 29th of November 2011 Magistrate Erlich did Give an Example Of "Changed Circumstances" and Her statement was to Move Interstate out of Victoria. Unbelievable!!!!!. Magistrate Erlich's Decision made no sense as Intervention orders are State Based Orders.

On May the 24th 2012, a defendant appeared Before Magistrate Marc Sargent in a Magistrate's Court in Melbourne, The Defendant wanted to Revoke or have an End Date placed on an Intervention order that had been issued in Dec 2001, 10 and a half Years ago, The Defendant had not had any Contact with His Ex Brother-in-law Since Dec 2004, Some 7 And a Half Years ago.

Magistrate Marc Sargent told The Defendant that there was Little Evidence he could give in Court, Because his Ex- Brother-in-law who was Contesting The Application was a Protected Witness. The Defendant had Sought Legal Aid but was Quoted $700 for the Defendant to be Legally Represented in Court. A Fee The Defendant Couldn't afford.

The Defendant Explained to The Magistrate that he had not been a family Member since the Year 2000, when he Divorced his Ex Wife some 12 Years ago, nor was he When The Intervention order was issued in 2001.

The Defendant's ex Brother-in-law said there had been no Breeches of The Order Or reports to Police of any Kind in many Years, and The Defendant explained that the Dispute involving the Use of a Public facility which was around the Corner from His Ex-in-laws No Longer Existed as he Now Went Elsewhere.

Despite this Evidence, Magistrate Marc Sargent Then rejected The Defendant's Application on The Grounds that having The Order remain in Place created " No Impediment " to The Defendant's Day to Day Life.

So with Magistrate Marc Sargent's Decision, if you have no Breeches or No Contact with the applicant even though it may be 7 and a half years or More, If The Intervention Order Doesn't Create any Impediments to your Day To Day Life, Then you cannot Vary or Revoke the Intervention Order.

How Unjust and Draconian is This Decision Handed Down by Magistrate Marc Sargent on the 24Th May 2012. He also told the Defendant, If He Didn't Like it, Then Appeal to The County Court.

If The Defendant decided to Appeal to The County Court, Unless he spent a large amount of Money for a legal Representative, The "Protected Person" Provision still applies.

What Makes Magistrate Marc Sargent's Intervention Order Decision Even More Ridiculous is These Cases He Handed Down a decision in.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Granny basher jailed for two months.

A WOMAN who bashed an 82-year-old pensioner to steal $40 has been jailed for two months.

Julianne Gansberg, 40, attacked the pensioner because of her frailty and age, Magistrate Marc Sargent said, sentencing her to four months' jail, half of which was suspended for a year.

The pensioner told the court, "I don't feel that my life is safe any more and it makes me feel sad in my twilight years I feel like this."

The elderly victim said in her victim impact statement to Ringwood Magistrates' Court that she used to enjoy going out, but now felt the streets were unsafe and had become a prisoner in her own home.

"I hate sitting home on my own," she said.

Crime Victims Support Association president Noel McNamara said Parliament should set minimum terms for violence and the sentence in the Gansberg case should have been two years, not two months.

The court heard the victim was attacked as she walked from her home to nearby Eastland shopping centre, a trip she took each day, on May 29 last year.

Gansberg knocked her to the ground and tried to wrestle away her handbag, dragging her along the footpath in broad daylight, before making off with $40.

The court heard passing motorists saved the elderly victim from further attack.

"She used to laugh a lot but she doesn't now," the magistrate said, reading the victim's impact statement. He told Gansberg, "She won't ever get over it".

Prosecutor Leading Sen-Constable Fiona Calkin had called for an immediate custodial sentence, saying the court needed to take a stand against a spate of attacks on the elderly late last year and early this year.

"The elderly feel unsafe in the community," she said. Gansberg had initially lied to police about her identity, denied the attack and failed to show remorse.

"She has not pleaded guilty until a fairly late stage in the proceedings," she said.

"The victim was an easy target who was unable to protect herself. She was old and frail."

Mr Sargent said Gansberg, who pleaded guilty to robbery and assault, would have received twice the sentence if she did not suffer from an acquired brain injury as a result of a car accident.


Magistrate Marc Sargent also handed down This Sentence.

Man pleads guilty plea on car blaze

A LOWER Templestowe man has pleaded guilty to torching a Doncaster East teenager’s car after a dispute over a girl escalated into a “tit for tat” between two groups of youths.

Magistrate Marc Sargent sentenced Adam Galli, 21, to a six-month intensive corrections order for dousing 19-year-old Travis Harrison’s 1992 Holden Commodore in petrol before setting it on fire on February 2.

The dispute, spanning several weeks and involving Galli and Harrison’s respective friendship groups, included verbal and physical confrontations and saw tyres slashed, eggs thrown at cars and expanding foam sprayed into an exhaust pipe.


So How Does Magistrate Marc Sargent Justify his Decision of The 24th May 2012 in a Non Violent Intervention Order Case!!!!!.

WHAT IS THE POINT IN HANDING DOWN LENIENT SENTENCES IN SERIOUS ASSAULT & ARSON CASES AND THEN HAND DOWN A LONG INTERVENTION ORDER DECISION WHERE THE DEFENDANT HAS NOT SEEN THE APPLICANT IN 7 AND A HALF YEARS!!!!!!.

 THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF CRAZY INTERVENTION ORDER CASES IN VICTORIAN MAGISTRATE"S COURT"S.  

Crazy Intervention Orders In Victorian Magistrate's Courts.

This Blog Is Dedicated to the Memory of My Late Sister- In-law who was Tragically Murdered in her own home by My Brother-in-law in a Murder Suicide Many Years Ago. The shotgun that was used was obtained after My Brother-in-law was released from Prison for a breach of an Intervention Order.

According to Detectives they believe My Brother-in-law was given an address by an Inmate in Prison to go and pick up the Shotgun. Police were aware my Brother-in-law had a violent History but were unable to stop Him Killing my Sister-in-law.

The Post’s in this Blog Highlight some of The Crazy Intervention Orders that are issued in Magistrate’s Court’s in Victoria Today, Rather than focusing their attention on Dangerous and Violent People, Our Courts are Issuing Intervention Orders with Little Regard as to whether the Defendant is a dangerous or violent Person or whether the applicant is in Real Danger.

If you want an Intervention order Today you will most Likely be given One for any reason, as you will see in the Following accounts of Crazy Intervention Orders Granted In Victorian Magistrate’s Court’s.

What's The Point Max?????

On The 17th January 2012 the Defendant walked into Courtroom 8 at a Magistrate's Court in Melbourne To Seek a Variation to an Intervention Order Taken Out By the Defendant's Ex Brother-in-law on the 4th Dec 2001, over Ten Years Earlier. The Variation Sought was to end the order in 2 weeks Time.

The Defendant based his Application to Vary The Order on The Fact that he had not seen His Ex- Brother-in-law since December 2004.



 The Defendant had also been made aware of the Fact that his Ex-Brother-in-law no Longer Lived at The address Listed on the Intervention Order Because  evidence had previously been Given Under Oath Before Magistrate Erlich To That Effect.

 Hearing the case was Magistrate Max Cashmore, who advised the Defendant that his Ex Brother-in-law wanted The Matter Adjourned because he wanted to Contest The Application but he was on Holidays for another 12 days until the 29th January.

The Defendant argued that Intervention Orders issued in Melbourne Courts are Generally issued only for a period of 12 Months not 10 years, and the Intervention Order Variation should  be granted as the defendant had not had any contact with his ex Brother-in-law since December 2004 over 7 Years ago, at that Time the Defendant had entered Zagame's Restaurant to play The Pokies, had seen the other Party there and Then Left The premises.

Magistrate Max Cashmore then argued that Courts Don't issue intervention Orders for only 12 Months, they issue them for any Period Of Time, This statement by the Magistrate was rather Odd, Because the Defendant sat at The back of The Court after his Matter Was Adjourned as His ex Brother-in-law had Requested and Magistrate Max Cashmore granted a Number of intervention Orders for only a period of 12 Months.

So what are These Intervention Orders all About, They are About The Use of Gymnasiums in Melbourne by the Defendant.

In 1990 the Defendant had become a member of the Gym Pictured at Left in Melbourne. He Coutinued as a regular Member at This Gym attending about 4 Times per Week for 11 Years but after the defendants Ex-In-laws issued Intervention Orders On Dec 4th 2001. Going to His regular Gym had now become a Criminal Offence and he Could be Charged For Breaking The Law!!!.



The Defendants Normal Routine Of Going to this Gym Then Technically Became a Breech Of an Intervention Order, Simply Based on the fact that a Small Part Of The Gym at one End Of The Complex was alleged to be Within 200 Metre's from His Ex Mother-in-laws Back fence. The Distance was Over 200 Metres if You Measured the Distance By Road From His Ex-Mother-in-Laws Driveway.

So The Defendant Could Face a $28,000 Fine or 2 Years in Jail For Doing what he had Been Doing regularly For Over A Decade, Despite the Fact There was no Physical Violence or Any Other Criminal Intent by The So Called Defendant.. Considering The Penalties in Place for a Breech Of an Intervention Order, You have To wonder about another Case Heard By Magistrate Max Cashmore.

A 23 Year Old Man was Described as Mercilessly Beating a Security Guard by punching him 17 Times, Kicking Him Five Times and Kneeing Him Once, Magistrate Max Cashmore was Quoted as Saying, It was for the Grace Of God The Victim was not Killed, He also said To The Victim, I'm Sorry to you, and The Community is Sorry that Someone Doing His Job Has To Put Up With This Conduct.

You would Think That anybody Committing This Type of Violent offence would Automatically  Receive a Jail Sentence for their Vicious Attack, But in This case Magistrate Max Cashmore Sentenced The attacker to a 4 Month Intensive Corrections Order, Which Requires The Attacker to Undergo Community Work, Report To Authorities Twice a Week and Undergo Counselling. The Attacker's Co Accused also Pleaded Guilty to Recklessly Causing Injury  And he Also Received  a Nine Month Community Service Order Without a conviction.

Magistrate Max Cashmore is quoted as Saying, The attacker only escaped Jail because Of His Age, 23 and Good References.

  You have to Really Wonder about The Inappropriate Use Of Intervention Orders and Sentencing In Victorian Magistrate's Court's???.

On The 17th April 2012 I sat In Courtroom 7 and Listened to a Contested Hearing Heard By Magistrate Max Cashmore.

The Dispute was Between 2 Former Girlfriends who Lived Not Far from Each Other. None Of the Testimony Given Contained any Evidence Of Violence, Threats or property Damage at all. Despite This Magistrate Max Cashmore allowed The Case to Continue Over 2 And a half Hours. There Was evidence of Finger Gestures etc, But nothing that would Warrant the issuing of an Intervention Order at all.



What's The Point in Magistrate Max Cashmore hearing this Contested Intervention Order Case when you Can Bash a Security Guard  and Receive only a 4 or 9 Month Intensive Corrections Order????. It Doesn't Make Sense. I spoke With the Defendant in This case and She Said That Intervention Orders were Way too Easy to Get and even The applicant's Barrister Couldn't Believe that he was in Court arguing Such Trivial Evidence.

Contested intervention Order Hearings can vary from the ridiculous to the Serious But Magistrate's and Court Registrar's Don't seem to be able to Differentiate between The Two, 2 Contested Hearings That came Before Magistrate Marc Sargent illustrates This point.

An elderly Woman on a Walker came Into Courtroom 8, Her daughter had taken out an Intervention Order against Her and she was seeking a Variation because her Daughter worked at a Bakery Chain which had 3 Shops, 2 were In different large Shopping Centres in Melbourne and The other was in a strip shopping Centre. I Have to be able to Shop Somewhere The woman told Magistrate Sargent, We Will have to Adjourn The Matter So it Can Be Clarified With Your daughter replied the Magistrate.

 The other Case was quite Serious, A Woman was seeking to Extend an Intervention order against Her Ex Boyfriend who was Currently in Jail on Armed Robbery Charges. It was obvious that Her Ex-Boyfriend was a Dangerous Individual But Magistrate Marc Sargent Adjourned The Case to Another Court that had Video Facilities, Which Meant The applicant would be Seriously Inconvenienced in having to Attend the Other Court.

 Magistrate Marc Sargent Concluded  the Defendant  had a Right to defend This Application to Extend The order, When I spoke to The woman later she said her Ex- Boyfriend was only Contesting the Matter so he could spend a day out of Jail, the woman said she wanted Nothing More To do With Her Ex Boyfriend and it would be extremely inconvenient for Her to get to the Court that Had Video Facilities to hear the Case.

The Magistrate's Court's In Melbourne Hear Intervention Order Cases that range From Extremely Serious To The Totally Ridiculous, Intervention Orders  are there to Protect People From Violence and should not be used on Meaningless and Trivial Disputes which are a waste of Police And Court Time. Magistrate's Handing Down Very Lenient Sentences for Violent Crime's also Makes a Mockery of Victoria's Justice System and the Court's.in Melbourne.

I Have Even Spoken With Defendant's That have had Intervention Order's Issued Against Them from a Magistrate's Court in Melbourne, Despite The Fact they lived in West Wyalong & Sydney???.